Pyogenic liver abscess in end‐stage renal disease patients: A nationwide longitudinal study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are more prone to infectious disease because of their immunocompromised status. However, the association between pyogenic liver abscess (PLA) and ESRD remains not clear. The aim of our study is to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of PLA in ESRD patients. We recruited all incident ESRD patients from the Taiwan National Health Insurance database from 1998 to 2006. The incidence rate of PLA in ESRD patients was compared with that of a randomly selected non-ESRD control group matched for age, sex gender, Charlson comorbidity score, diabetes mellitus, and cirrhosis. Among the 57,761 incident dialysis patients, there were 538 cases of PLA. The incidence rate of PLA was 18.20 per 10,000 person-years in the ESRD cohort and 6.34 per 10,000 person-years in matched control cohort. The rate of PLA was significantly higher in the ESRD cohort (hazard ratio 3.63, 95% confidence interval 2.83-4.65, P < 0.001). The mortality rates of PLA were higher in the ESRD cohort than those in matched control cohort. Diabetes mellitus was an independent risk factor for mortality of PLA. Compared with non-ESRD patients, ESRD patients have a higher risk of PLA and poorer outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".